revised January 14, 2020

Request for proposal

Accelerating the creation of a regional Freeway And Street-based Transit (“FAST”) network for the Research Triangle region of North Carolina

Study funding partners

Regional Transportation Alliance – the voice of the regional business community on transportation

GoTriangle – lead regional partner agency

North Carolina Department of Transportation – lead state partner agency Expected study timetable

RFP announced: October 24, 2019

RFP posted by: December 20, 2019

Optional pre-submittal call for potential proposers: January 10, 2020

RFP response deadline: January 23, 2020, by 4 p.m.

Potential selection committee meetings: early February 2020

Potential begin work announcement: February 2020

Draft final report due: April 17, 2020

Public comment period begins: May 2020

Final report due: June 2020

revised January 14, 2020

2

Summary The Regional Transportation Alliance, with support from GoTriangle and NCDOT, is commissioning a study to accelerate the creation of a regional Freeway And Street-based Transit (“FAST”) network that would better connect the entire Triangle area while improving accessibility and opportunity. A regional FAST network will consist of rapid, frequent, reliable, and easy-to-use bus service along a series of interconnected corridors, enhanced and strengthened by scalable investments in transit advantage infrastructure along those corridors. This study will look at existing and proposed transit routes to identify a viable, illustrative Freeway And Street-based Transit (FAST) network and recommend scalable transit advantage investments and strategies that NCDOT, municipalities, and GoTriangle can adopt to accelerate its creation. The study will look for creative opportunities to expand any existing projects and plans into larger regional FAST corridors, particularly along major roadways such as I-40, 540, US 1, NC 147 and NC 54. This study will complement existing and planned investments, and provide ideas and examples for ongoing transportation planning efforts, including updates to the county transit plans and federal and state planning processes. At its core, this project is about advancing ideas for improving and accelerating regional connectivity, not committing to specific lines on a map. Context Voters in Durham, Orange and Wake counties all have approved a half-cent sales tax to invest in transit improvements. Wake County’s existing transit plan currently includes four bus rapid transit corridors serving Raleigh, Cary, and Garner, while Orange County’s plan has a BRT project in Chapel Hill. The five planned BRT corridors will include dedicated bus lanes for the majority of each corridor in addition to priority at traffic signals, near-level boarding platforms and other advantages. Each regional FAST network corridor would also have transit signal priority but may not include dedicated lanes. A regional FAST network would effectively complement, extend, and link the five urban BRT corridors, while providing seamless connections to the proposed commuter rail. Though each county develops its own transit plan, together they seek to create a unified regional transit network, and this study will help inform more detailed work. This study should also complement ongoing studies including the CAMPO “RED” transit lanes study, DCHC MPO studies on the US 15-501 and NC 54 corridor, GoTriangle feasibility studies for the Regional Transit Center relocation and Wake County park-and-rides, the Durham and Orange county transit plan updates, and the recently-completed Triangle Strategic Tolling Study. The study also should provide a framework to support planning for transit elsewhere in North Carolina.

revised January 14, 2020

3

Introduction

The Research Triangle region is one of the most dynamic and attractive markets in the nation, from both an economic vitality and quality of life perspective. Our foundational strength lies in the number of innovative people, organizations, institutions, and assets in close proximity to each other. As we grow, maintaining those connections and opportunities will be paramount to our ongoing success. Given the size and dispersion of our market, and the urgency for solutions now that will also serve us as we continue to grow amidst population increase and technology change, the regional business community supports the rapid implementation of an effective, scalable multimodal transportation system for our region. We believe that the accelerated deployment of enhanced transit service and infrastructure along key regional corridors will advance and honor a number of principles and goals, including economic opportunity, equitable prosperity, fiscal responsibility, technology risk management, environmental sustainability, and climate change. The study partners also believe that the scaled implementation of a regional FAST network will provide the communities of the Research Triangle region with effective, all-day mobility that will complement existing and emerging travel options at an affordable price, while serving as a valuable template for other regions of the state. The study partners are committed to the transformation of our highway network into true multimodal freeways and streets that provide significant and sustainable advantages for public transit buses and vanpools, along with enhanced access and mobility for all modes of travel.

revised January 14, 2020

4

Overview of current and upcoming transit services

Existing transit service and infrastructure

There are a number of existing regional express routes and many local routes served by GoTriangle, Chapel Hill Transit, GoRaleigh, GoDurham, GoCary, the NC State Wolfline, and Duke University Transit.

There are a handful of short roadway segments dedicated for bus usage or stopping, including a roadway on NC State’s campus parallel to Hillsborough Street and selected bus stop areas across the region.

The region’s freeway network includes an extensive Bus On Shoulder System (BOSS) that assists transit bus travel during peak travel periods on segments of I-40 and the Wade Avenue freeway in Wake and Durham counties. (BOSS in western Johnston County is also authorized but not currently active.) The region is also implementing BOSS to assist a recently launched transit route along I-540 in Wake County.

Ongoing and upcoming transit service and infrastructure enhancements

Durham, Orange, and Wake counties have all successfully passed countywide transit referenda (in 2011, 2012, and 2016, respectively) that provide locally-controlled, dedicated transit funds for their communities. Those local option funds – with ½-cent sales taxes as the primary source, complemented by $10 in vehicle fees – must be used to supplement, and not supplant, existing transit offerings.

All counties have expanded the service frequency of existing routes, and have added a number of new routes.

The Research Triangle region is currently developing and or studying for future development five bus rapid transit (BRT) corridors with at least 50% dedicated lanes for each corridor:

o Wake County four BRT corridors – Raleigh-East: New Bern; Raleigh-North: Capital Blvd; Raleigh-South/Garner: South Wilmington St; Raleigh-West/Cary: Western Blvd

o Orange County BRT corridor – Chapel Hill: North-South

These BRT corridors will begin opening in 2023-24 (Raleigh-East: New Bern and Chapel Hill: North South); all BRT five corridors will be open by 2027.

The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) has commenced a RED bus lanes study to examine other potential locations within Wake County where dedicated transit lanes could be added. Note: “RED” refers to both the color red as well as an acronym for complementary, permitted uses: Right turns, Emergency vehicles, Driveway access.

In addition, CAMPO and area partners have successfully programmed in the STIP $100m in state funding to extend the Raleigh-Garner and Raleigh-Cary BRT corridors east to Clayton (in Johnston County) and west to Morrisville (near the Durham Co. line), respectively, via portions of roads including US 70 business and NC 54.

The City of Raleigh was successful in receiving $3.75m in the STIP to upgrade the Raleigh Citywide Signal System. This will help to implement transit signal priority (TSP) and will in turn assist the operation of bus rapid transit and frequent network service.

The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) and area partners are currently reviewing the potential for adding BRT service and/or infrastructure for sections of US 15-501 and NC 54 between Durham and Chapel Hill, as well as sections of NC 147 (future I-885), NC 54, and US 70.

GoTriangle and its area partners are currently evaluating the potential for initiating commuter rail service along the existing North Carolina Railroad Company corridor in the region.

GoTriangle is evaluating the potential to relocate the Regional Transit Center to a location closer to I-40 with the potential for direct access to and from I-40.

GoTriangle is evaluating potential relocation or creation of new park and ride facilities closer to I-540 in North Raleigh and closer to Wade Avenue and/or I-440 in West Raleigh.

Wake County has a detailed implementation plan for expanding and enhancing bus transit service and proposed commuter rail over the next 5-10 years within the county, funded by local option funds, in concert with federal funding and any available state funds.

Durham and Orange counties are currently undertaking a review of their respective transit plans after the discontinuation of a light rail proposal for their communities.

revised January 14, 2020

5

Additional background on regional business community engagement on transit

The Regional Transportation Alliance (RTA) serves as the voice of the regional business community in the Triangle market. RTA and its 27 member chambers of commerce have consistently advocated for fast, enhanced transit across the region, and RTA remains committed to the accelerated completion of regional transit corridors that will serve commuters, residents, and visitors.

RTA and our four founding chambers (Raleigh Chamber, Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce, Cary Chamber of Commerce, and The Chamber For a Greater Chapel Hill-Carrboro) have each led major transit and transportation referenda during this decade.

RTA has held more than 10 leadership briefing and tours to other markets during the past 15 years – several of which highlighted existing and proposed bus rapid transit offerings.

The RTA BRT Opportunity Series event in Durham in fall 2019, developed in concert with the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce and the Chamber For a Greater Chapel Hill-Carrboro, further highlighted potential BRT enhancements.

revised January 14, 2020

6

Study objectives and definitions

There are two overall objectives for this study:

1. Define and communicate an illustrative regional FAST network, including scalable buildout scenarios

Create a series of illustrative network maps over several horizon years, first developing a methodology based on a set of guidelines, principles, standards, or criteria.

2. Identify potential scalable investments in transit advantage infrastructure along freeways and arterials to support the regional FAST network scenarios developed in study objective 1

Detail strategies, treatments, and projects that will support and accelerate the creation of each illustrative regional FAST network scenario.

Each illustrative regional “Freeway And Street-based Transit” (FAST) network will deliver enhanced transit service that is rapid, frequent, reliable, and easy-to-use. The FAST network scenarios will effectively link the region and complement, extend, and link the five proposed urban BRT corridors in the Triangle, while providing seamless connections to the proposed commuter rail. The following section outlines the requirements for and elements of a viable regional FAST network. Note that regional FAST networks do not require a minimum percentage (or any) dedicated lanes.

Requirements and elements of a viable regional FAST network pertaining to study objective 1 o Minimum frequency and span: To be suggested by study team; an example would be 10 minute

peak/20 minute off-peak, or 15 minute all-day, for 14+ hours weekdays o Minimum stop/station spacing: To be suggested by study team; an example would be an

average of every ½--mile or minimum ¼-mile spacing o Simplified route naming and branding: To be suggested by study team; required and distinct

from local, non-frequent service

Requirements and elements of a viable regional FAST network pertaining to study objective 2 o Transit advantages at station: At a minimum, near-level boarding design and approval by

NCDOT/municipalities o Transit advantages along corridor: At a minimum, transit signal priority (TSP), BOSS including at

on-ramp signals

Optional elements of a viable regional FAST network pertaining to study objective 2 o Transit advantages along corridor: Examples include queue jumps, dedicated lanes, express

shoulders, etc.

The following are other expected elements of regional FAST networks, but not the focus of this study o Real-time information: all buses trackable by the public using TransLoc, Transit, or similar apps o Station enhancements: shelters at all stations, route and schedule information at all stations o Transit advantages at station: near-level boarding pad, off-board fare collection o Vehicle branding: required and distinct from local, non-frequent service o Vehicle propulsion: electric, compressed natural gas, or hydrogen fuel cell by 2027 o See reference page 16 for a broader list of potential transit enhancements

Overall guidance to proposers We are looking for innovative approaches, thinking, and communication methods for both of the study objectives that will advance the development of viable regional FAST networks, attract and maintain transit ridership, and provide sustained operational effectiveness, including seamless connections with commuter rail and other transit services.

revised January 14, 2020

7

Study objective 1: Define and communicate an illustrative regional FAST network, including scalable buildout

scenarios

This objective is focused on the identification of one or more viable, illustrative regional FAST networks – with at least one scenario showing an interconnected initial regional FAST network serving Wake, Durham, and Orange counties by 2027, coincident with the planned completion of all five proposed bus rapid transit corridors – and then one or more future expanded networks. Requirements and deliverables

The goal of this objective is to define a viable, scalable FAST network in the Research Triangle, over multiple horizon years, to accelerate its creation and expansion and help broaden enhanced transit considerations, across our region and state.

Based on this review, and informed by their work under study objective 2, the study team shall develop several maps depicting a viable illustrative regional FAST network along our multimodal freeway, arterial, and street network over a series of horizon years. The map(s) should be appropriate for a general business audience; at a minimum, any maps should include the five approved bus rapid transit lines and FAST network connections between them, linking to commuter rail as appropriate. The study team may also include whatever data they believe appropriate for non-technical and technical audiences.

The study team shall choose at least four horizon years: o The first year shall be 2025 or 2027 (i.e., coincident with the opening of multiple BRT lines). o The second year shall be 2030 o The third and fourth years shall be 2035 and 2045 (i.e., coincident with MTP horizon years) o If additional horizon years are chosen, those are at the discretion of the study team.

The study team shall first develop methods, guidelines, criteria or principles for creating the illustrative regional FAST networks, and then create the illustrative networks based on those methods, guidelines, criteria, or principles, consistent with the requirements of a viable regional FAST network.

o Existing or proposed service levels or patronage, transit supportive uses, and time and ease of implementation are examples of areas that could be considered.

The study team shall define and summarize minimum operational standards for high-frequency, reliable service across the FAST network; see objectives and requirements above and guidance below.

All proposed illustrative networks must successfully link all five approved BRT routes together and directly serve Raleigh-Durham International Airport, Research Triangle Park (at Hub RTP), and Downtown Durham. Note that the five planned BRT routes will directly serve Downtown Raleigh, Cary, and Chapel Hill. The study team can assume that the four approved Wake County BRT lines will interconnect in Downtown Raleigh.

The study team shall integrate each of the illustrative networks with appropriate connections to the proposed commuter rail (minimum two locations). The study team will be briefed upon project award about the status of the commuter rail study and its findings.

While the study is more focused with defining a regionwide network of interconnected transit corridors, rather than specific transit routings station locations, or optimal frequencies using those corridors, the study team shall provide a general sense of route recommendations (e.g., start/end points), example all-day or peak frequency, and potential route type (high frequency, rush hour express, etc.), and potential interlining benefits among key corridors. However, the study partners are not looking for detailed analysis on potential transit service.

revised January 14, 2020

8

Guidance, encouragements, and other considerations

Other than what is listed in the requirements listed above, there are no particular freeways or other roadways, nor is there a required transit route or destination, that must be included in the networks – we are looking for creative solutions from the study team.

As a starting point in the development of the initial network(s), we suggest that the study team should review all transit routes with existing or proposed (by 2027) weekday service frequency of 30 minutes or better. This will include the five proposed BRT corridors in Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Cary, and Garner, the proposed Wake Transit/GoRaleigh frequent network, as well as many routes in the NC State Wolfline transit system, the Duke University Transit system, Chapel Hill Transit, and the GoCary, GoDurham, GoRaleigh, and GoTriangle systems. The study team should analyze the adopted county transit plans, the 10-year Wake Bus Capital and Operating Plan, and adopted short range service plans for each provider. The study team should also review current MTPs and CTPs as a starting point for analysis. The funding partners will provide information at the outset of the study about current frequent network information as well as implementation regionwide.

The study team is not limited to the above routes, corridors, or information, nor is it required to

incorporate all of these routes in the regional FAST networks.

The study team should coordinate with NCDOT re: the Complete 540 project, the upcoming I-885 improvements between East End Connector and I-40, and other ongoing or upcoming construction projects, if/as necessary – based on the direction of the partners.

The proposed networks should consider the existing Bus On Shoulder System (BOSS) on I-40 and the Wade Avenue freeway and consider the potential for BOSS expansion along various freeways and other roadways, possible tolled express shoulder lanes (particularly on 540 in north Raleigh), and/or a combination.

The study team should consider land use or transit propensity-related measures when developing its initial criteria. These might include basic measures of transit propensity (e.g., jobs density, housing density, income, car ownership, age, ethnicity, etc.) and/or availability of “last-mile” solutions.

Regarding minimum operational standards for the regional FAST network, the study team should describe minimum mid-day weekday frequency levels, etc. as well as potential inclusion of express routes to complement the system.

The study team may determine map extents, and could even create multiple versions of the same map with different map extents.

To show scalability and improvements during subsequent horizon years, the proposed routes could be extended, or frequency improved, or intensity of transit advantage could change for buildout scenarios depicting later horizon years.

revised January 14, 2020

9

Study objective 2: Identify scalable investments in transit advantage infrastructure along freeways and arterials to support the regional FAST network scenarios This objective is focused on identifying projects, treatments, and strategies that can accelerate the creation of transit advantages along the regional FAST networks defined in study objective 1 in a rapid, scalable fashion. Requirements and deliverables

The outcome of this objective is to identify an example suite of investments and strategies that will help make our freeways and other roadways “transit ready,” transform them into multimodal freeways and arterials, and thereby support the creation and expansion of a regional FAST network and help institutionalize a transit focus throughout transportation corridor planning, design, and construction.

We are looking for a menu of recommended feasible strategies, as well as specific example investments along key existing or potential freeway and arterial corridors. Examples could include specific locations of all-day or part-time dedicated or priority “RED” transit lanes. Note: “RED” refers to both the color red as well as an acronym for complementary, permitted uses: Right turns, Emergency vehicles, Driveway access. Please use “RED” transit lanes, instead of “BAT” lanes, for all materials with this study.

The study team shall examine the potential for temporary or permanent direct linkages – potentially restricted to transit only – between the illustrative FAST corridors and area freeways. At a minimum, these should include links between each of the five proposed bus rapid transit corridors and approved extensions in Wake, Orange, and Johnston counties and freeways including I-40 and I-440. In addition, the study team should be aware that DCHC MPO is currently planning for the potential of the Clayton to Morrisville BRT to expand to Durham County along NC 147, and Chapel Hill Transit is looking at potential expansion of service to Pittsboro in Chatham County. Detailed transit route analysis is not required.

The project team shall actively review upcoming freeway and arterial construction projects for the potential for incorporating transit advantage strategies using relatively modest design enhancements. To extent possible, the study team should also review ongoing construction projects for the same purpose, recognizing that cost and practicality will be paramount for any potential success.

The study team shall consider how their recommendations will create or advance a network-wide, scalable approach of increasing transit operational efficiency and reliability.

The study team shall consider and describe potential funding mechanisms for at least some of their recommendations – some may not require new funding at all, while others may have greater or lesser degrees of viability from federal/state/other funding sources. To the extent practicable, we are seeking a level of detail sufficient to inform or guide MPOs, transit agencies, and NCDOT in potential submission to the statewide prioritization process, countywide transit or municipal capital improvement programs, etc. if and where appropriate (e.g., should include MTP, CTP, local plans, etc.) as well as corridor-based bus rapid transit submissions for federal Small Starts funding. The study team may suggest new sources.

A natural tradeoff exists between speed and perfection. The study team shall focus at least some of their analysis and recommendations – and potentially all of them – on achievable, feasible concepts that are quicker, easier to implement, at lower cost – and that do not preclude, or unduly consume resources for, more major or “perfect,” longer term solutions.

The study shall weigh the degree to which recommendations maintain their “transit advantage” or travel time savings as time moves forward and congestion levels increase. While the study has a bias for scalability, this bias should not preclude appropriate consideration of higher-cost projects that can retain travel time and reliability advantages over time.

revised January 14, 2020

10

The study team shall incorporate a few example concepts (not design) for freeway- and major arterial- adjacent stations that speak to transit advantages and maintaining rapid, frequent, and reliable service.

The study team shall determine an effective, viable way to implement near-level boarding for stations along arterial roadways located within the clear zone, using examples from other regions and effective coordination with NCDOT.

The study team shall provide some specific examples as well as general guidance and strategies for retrofitting transit advantages in constrained environments, along with tradeoffs for same, including right-of-way constraints and context sensitivity implications into analysis and recommendations to the degree practical. Consideration and minimization of negative impacts on overall traffic should be paramount – recognizing that one bus in traffic represents 35 or more commuters, not just one.

Guidance, encouragements, and other considerations

This study is more than a brainstorming session but less than final design.

Given the focus on scalability, speed of implementation, and cost effectiveness (“bang for the buck”), recommendations that are of a pilot or “tactical urbanism” nature are encouraged – that is, pilot projects that can demonstrate transit advantage quickly and cost-effectively.

The study team should also develop general recommendations for institutionalizing cost-effective accommodations for scalable transit enhancements as part of major roadway projects, particularly in metropolitan areas. An example might be cross section or pavement width design recommendations – either all-day or varying by time-of-day, if appropriate.

The study team should include some recommendations on improvements that will benefit all users, not just transit, when doing so will be cost-effective, sustainable, and enhance public support for the scalable implementation of this initiative.

While study objective 1 will require the study team to understand existing and proposed transit services, and be familiar with existing and anticipated regional travel markets and demands in a general way, this study is primarily focused on the development of illustrative regional FAST networks, and the identification of rapidly deployable infrastructure and operational enhancements to support them, rather than detailed analysis that introduces new potential transit routes.

The study team should be aware of new or emerging technological advances that can create new potential transit advantages and/or enhance those advantages, and integrate those appropriately in analysis and recommendations.

The study team may, but is not required to, consider transit advantage strategies for buses to return to and from major depot, layby, and electrical recharging locations.

This study shall not make recommendations on transit shelters, station design, or similar, unless needed to successfully complete the study purpose. A primary goal of this study is to provide sufficient transit advantages through capital investments and operational treatments, and thereby make transit reliability and speed more likely, such that shelter quality becomes less important over time, since patrons will be spending less time waiting for buses.

revised January 14, 2020

11

Study geography For simplicity, this study will primarily focus on the existing and proposed freeway and rural/suburban arterial system in the core of the Triangle. In general, these are roads posted at 40 MPH and higher, in Wake, Durham, and Orange counties, although some roads posted at 35 MPH below could be considered for FAST networks. Corridors to consider include:

Existing and future freeways including I-40, I-87, I-440, I-540/NC 540 including upcoming extension to I-40, NC 147, future I-885, US 1 north of I-540 and south of I-40, US 70 east of Garner and between future I-885 and I-540, Wade Ave. freeway, US 15-501 in Durham, US 64 west of US 1

Other four or more lane regional arterial roadways, ideally with at least partial control of access, generally those posted at 40 MPH or higher, in particular NC 54 between Chapel Hill and I-40, NC 54 between Durham and RTP (parallel to I-40), US 64 west of US 1, US 70 east of I-540, US 1 south of I-540, and US 15-501 between Durham and Chapel Hill

Other major roadways, generally those posted at 40 MPH or higher Primary geographic focus area

Wake, Durham, and Orange counties

Areas within the primary commuting shed boundary to the Research Triangle Region (note: NCDOT has an active study to identify the primary commuting boundaries of the five largest regions of the state)

Potential additional geographic focus areas to consider

Johnston County, particularly the portions west of I-95

Chatham County, particularly the portions east of NC 87

Franklin County, particularly the portions south of NC 56

Granville County, particularly the portions south and east of NC 56 and I-85

Harnett County, particularly the portions north of US 421 and west of I-95

Alamance County, particularly the portions east of NC 87

Lee County, particularly the portions east and north of NC 87 and US 421

Nash County, particularly the portions south and west of NC 56 and I-95

Wilson County, particularly the portions west of I-95

revised January 14, 2020

12

Study pricing, proposal requirements, and evaluation criteria

The contract price will not exceed $100,000. Response framework

Scope: This RFP provides primary objectives and requirements. Beyond these, prospective study teams will submit their proposed scopes; i.e., they will propose on the amount of value they can provide for the maximum $100,000 amount, and how quickly they can effectively complete the work.

Firms may submit up to two proposals – study teams may be different for the two proposals. Payment schedule

First payment will be $25,000, upon contract award.

Next payment will be $25,000, will be upon submission of draft report.

Final payment of $50,000 will be upon successful conclusion of report. Firm and team requirements

While teams are not required, we recognize that not all companies have all expertise, so we encourage teams where appropriate.

Having a physical presence in the Triangle or North Carolina is not required, although it may be noted in your proposal.

RTA membership is not required, although it may be noted on your proposal.

Teams should make note of both local availability of professionals and/or national expert staff for this project.

Project time focus and public outreach

RTA will handle meeting scheduling between the study team and the funding partners. There may be very few of these meetings, and this is not designed to be either a time or facilitation burden.

This is a guidance and strategy document, rather than a plan, so public outreach will be limited, with the study team primarily focused on meeting the requirements of objectives 1 and 2.

There will be a 21 day period to finalize the draft document – this includes time for review by funding partners and study team incorporation of comments.

The study team should assume a 30 day public response period for draft findings, followed by sufficient time and resources to modify the deliverables based on those comments.

Teams should include time and resources for packaging the final materials and presenting findings to various audiences within this market within their proposal and thinking.

Proposal responses

RFP response deadline: January 23, 2020, by 4 p.m.

Send email with proposal attached in pdf form to Joe Milazzo II – joe@letsgetmoving.org

Use email subject: “FAST study RESPONSE – [firm or team name]” (proposal response information continued on next page)

revised January 14, 2020

13

Proposal requirements

Maximum 5 pages of content to describe your approach for meeting the study objectives

Include timeline and summary of proposed deliverables (based on the information in this RFP) – these will not count against maximum 5 pages

May attach examples of similar work – these will not count against maximum 5 pages

May attach information about key personnel and resumes– these will not count against maximum 5 pages

Include preferred communication methods/frequency with study steering committee Evaluation and selection process

Members of study steering committee and senior advisory team organizations will review proposals

Steering committee will rank proposals based on consensus evaluation of value

Interviews may or may not be held

Feedback and refinement of scope may be held with recommended proposer Weighted Evaluation criteria

20% - Demonstrated understanding of the project and objectives

20% - Innovative approaches, mindsets

15% - Problem solving approach, as evidenced by past work or conveyed in their proposal

15% - Experience with bus rapid transit and enhanced transit planning, design, and operations

15% - Experience with innovative, practical traffic engineering solutions

15% - Expertise with communicating, marketing Additional criteria for differentiation between proposers and teams

Availability of staff

Timeline for completion Other items that would be considered

Presence of staff in this market that are familiar with the region and its freeway and street network

Demonstrated ability to distill, balance, and address a variety of feedback from a wide range of partners

Intangibles – please tell us what we should have asked you in the RFP to differentiate you and your team Questions

Please provide questions in email form to: Joe Milazzo II – joe@letsgetmoving.org

Use email subject: “FAST study Qs – [firm or team name]”

revised January 14, 2020

14

Study review and reporting A Steering Committee of funding partners will coordinate the study effort and engage in regular project reviews, at minimum on a monthly basis. The cadence and scheduling of meetings will be determined at the start of the study. Steering Committee - funding partners

Regional Transportation Alliance

Joe Milazzo II, Executive Director

Natalie Ridout, Policy and Member Engagement Director

Jay Irby, Triangle Area Executive, First Citizens Bank, RTA chair, rapid research GoTriangle

Shelley Blake Curran, Interim Chief Executive Officer and President

Katharine Eggleston, Chief Development Officer

Jay Heikes, Transportation Planner

Patrick Stephens, Director of Transit Operations NC Department of Transportation

Julie White, Deputy Secretary for Multimodal Transportation

Hanna Cockburn, Director, Bicycle and Pedestrian and Public Transportation Division

Joe Furstenberg, Transportation Consultant, Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation

Joey Hopkins, Division 5 Engineer

Mike Mills, Division 7 Engineer

Kevin Bowen, Division 4 Engineer

Greg Burns, Division 6 Engineer

Brandon Jones, Division 8 Engineer

Joe Hummer, State Traffic Management Engineer The Steering Committee will engage a senior advisory team, including but not limited to the stakeholders listed on the next page, to periodically review study information and offer feedback. The study team will not have to engage the Senior Advisory Team.

revised January 14, 2020

15

Senior Advisory Team

Chris Lukasina, Director, Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization

Alex Rickard, Deputy Director, Capital Area MPO

Felix Nwoko, Senior Manager, Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization

Aaron Cain, Planning Manager, Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro MPO

David Eatman, Transit Administrator, City of Raleigh/GoRaleigh

Michael Moore, Director of Transportation, City of Raleigh

Ken Bowers, Director of Planning, City of Raleigh

Mila Vega, Transit Planning Supervisor, City of Raleigh/GoRaleigh

Sean Egan, Director of Transportation, City of Durham

Pat Young, Director, Durham City-County Planning

Keith Chadwell, Deputy City Manager, City of Durham

Bill Judge, Assistant Director of Transportation, City of Durham

Danna Widmar, Director of Special Projects, Town of Cary

Kelly Blazey, Transit Administrator, Town of Cary/GoCary

Jerry Jensen, Director of Transportation and Facilities, Town of Cary

Brian Litchfield, Transit Director, Town of Chapel Hill/Chapel Hill Transit

Bergen Watterson, Director of Transportation, Town of Chapel Hill

Nicole Kreiser, Assistant County Manager – transit, Wake County

Tim Gardiner, Planning Manager, Wake County

Drew Cummings, Chief of Staff, Durham County

Craig Benedict, Planning and Inspections Director, Orange County

John Hodges-Copple, Planning Director, Triangle J Council of Governments

revised January 14, 2020

16

Reference – types of transit advantages and enhancements This page outlines a number of potential transit investments that will or may be part of a regional FAST network, in two overall groupings based on primary responsibility and control. Group A - Operational and capital transit advantages and enhancements that are largely or completely within the control of transit agencies – this category relates to study objective 1:

Number of transit routes serving a station or corridor

Frequent service, particularly during weekday periods (e.g., 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.)

Number of stations / stop spacing

Station location philosophy (e.g., “be on the way” / directness of routing)

Through routing / concurrent routing / interlining / “Go zones” to improve effective frequency

Extended daily and weekly span of service (e.g., 18 hours / 7 days)

Quality of stations

Off-board fare collection

Fare technology

Fare policies

Attractive vehicles, inside and out

Route signage

“Trip planner” mobile technology applications for patrons

Corridor, route, or vehicle branding

Propulsion mechanism (e.g., electric, compressed natural gas)

Number and type of buses deployed along a particular route

Multiple door boarding and alighting

Door height to support level boarding Group B - Operational and capital transit advantages and enhancements with significant responsibility or control by NCDOT / municipal partners – this category relates to study objective 2:

Transit signal priority (both detection and phasing plans)

Queue jumps for transit

Transit bypass lanes at on-ramp signals

Permanent or time-of-day dedicated lanes for transit

Bus On Shoulder System (BOSS) operation

Transit slip ramps / dedicated bus connections between roadways

Near level boarding (e.g., policies and acceptable designs and locations for higher speed arterials)

Operational and capital improvements for all vehicles, that improve bus transit operations

Creation or maintenance of transit advantages during roadway construction or reconstruction

Specific station locations along or adjacent to freeways and arterials

Land use policies and municipal capital improvements that encourage transit-supportive dense, mixed-use, and walkable development patterns near stations.